These are questions of blasphemy:!: You have got to beleive all the work
that has gone into this theory, it's been such a chore... you cant believe
how much shit these guys have gone through to get to the highest of the high.

Sean Carroll is a bit more respectable, but unfortunately a whole new level
of maniacal delusion. Carroll has the same ol' mantra, 'thou shalt not ask'
for every tricky question possible.

Listen to all these guys, they all got that same air of priesthood-fulness _________________~"“True observation begins when devoid of set patterns, and freedom of expression occurs when one is beyond systems.”"~

The Heisenberg uncertainty principle is one statement of the inherent
measurement uncertainty in quantum mechanics. It states that the more
precisely a particle's position is known, the less precisely its momentum
is known, and vice versa.

The exact position and momentum of an electron cannot be simultaneously
determined. This is because electrons simply don't have a definite position,
and direction of motion, at the same time!

Evolution is the resistance to entropy (organisation = intelligence) required to maintain equilibrium in any discontinuous (discrete) system. In synchronous systems, resolution (definition) is the result of the resonance that comes from the cyclical expression of information._________________The grand design, reflected in the face of Chaos.

Evolution is the resistance to entropy (organisation = intelligence) required to maintain equilibrium in any discontinuous (discrete) system. In synchronous systems, resolution (definition) is the result of the resonance that comes from the cyclical expression of information.

Love it as always.
The cyclical expression of information, is the mind._________________~"“True observation begins when devoid of set patterns, and freedom of expression occurs when one is beyond systems.”"~

Above is another Bill Gaede logic triumph, as he exposes
deep the flaws in the fundamentals of modern physics.

Below is a well-know goon for the physics research cartel.

Having seen Bill's coherent and understandable arguments,
you'll be ROTFLMAO as the lecture below progresses.

Starting at 7 minutes she rolls out the usual Big-Bangie BS in all it's gory
and she then proceeds to lay out a preposterous and increasingly outlandish
load of mathematical mumbo-jumbo as she disappears up her own wormhole.

I'm LOLLin at Renate
So this is the level of thinking they're working within 'academia',
how the hell do you expect anyone to get out of that kind of straight
jacket, it's a waste of potential for people like Renate, it's a shame !

Within the first two minutes, she's already brought up nonsense.
"We need to understand the quantum structure".... OK, so who's going
to do that then ? _________________~"“True observation begins when devoid of set patterns, and freedom of expression occurs when one is beyond systems.”"~

The Planck length is 1.616 X 10-35 meters long. That’s about 1 ten-octillionth the diameter of an atom.

The Plank length was conceived by Max Planck in 1899, in his attempt to establish "natural units" of mass, length and time. (He didn’t name it after himself, of course; others did.) The Planck length is actually derived from the Planck mass, which -- forgive me for the technical divergence here – calculates the mass at which the Schwarzschild radius (the size of a body’s Black Hole event horizon) is the same size as its quantum-mechanical Compton wavelength (the spread of a particle’s wave-function). Well, hmmmm. It all ends up saying that the Planck mass – which is roughly equivalent to the mass of a largish biological cell – can become a Black Hole if it’s compressed to the size of a Plank length.

The Planck length has become a very important player in modern physics, because it describes the size at which quantum mechanical and relativistic effects become equal partners in determining how things behave. This is the domain where quantum mechanics happen, where the universe changes from a smooth analogic continuum to a grainy region, where all events occur in sudden jumps with no intervening transitions. There is no physical reality to any length smaller than the Planck length. (My gosh, who would need a smaller space than 1 ten-octillionth the diameter of an atom to define the basic dimensional building block of the universe?)

The claim is that a holographic "jitter" in reality should be visible using
special equipment that can probe the subatomic level.

But it's a questionable claim because the resolution of the equipment
is only subatomic scale and nowhere near the far smaller Planck scale.

I've concluded the "holographic" mechanism is operating at Planck level.
It's been my best fit option for a long time, but now I've little doubt.

However the term "holograph" should be regarded only a rough analogy.

Our real world technological holograms of today are ephemeral.
There is nothing actually there, there. Just ephemeral images.

That cannot apply to a Holographic Universe. There's real mass.

A "hologram" is a 2D surface making a real looking 3D Hologram, so
we figured maybe some distant 2D surface could make a 3D Universe.

But it's not just any 2D surface behind this.

It's 2D wrapped round a 3D volume. It's a Sphere.
Or to be exact it's Omni-Planck-Spheres. Lots of 'em.

The 3D Conceptual volume inside the dancing Planck spheres
fills all Space with a sub-microscopic sea of seething possibility.

Turning.... inside-out... to manifest
and then outside-in..... to observe.

And I love this gem found on Quora:

Quote:

Is the universe pixelated?
Naveed Hussain, Faculty Member Physics
Answered Mar 23, 2018
There exists a more fundamental concept than plank’s constant.
The rate of change of moment of inertia is equal to plank’s constant

Here's Floyd Maxwell, BSC with a dynamite critique and a simple model.
That's quite similar to what Mr. Rational Science, Bill Gaede brings.
Maxwell has deeper critiques and startling solutions.
Such as questioning the fixed speed of light.

The 'energy' part of his model may intersect
with a holographic Planck-scale solution.

I've just scratched the surface and here's an overview:

Quote:

"Correct theories of physics are perfect things, and a replacement theory must be a new perfect thing, not an imperfection added onto an old perfect thing. This is the essence of "revolution", the replacement of the old with a new, not the adding of more crap to the old."
- Richard Feynman

"Relish the opportunity to be an outsider. Embrace that label.
Because it's the outsiders who change the world and who make
a real and lasting difference.
Treat the word 'impossible' as nothing more than motivation."
- President Donald J. Trump

Spring-And-Loop Theory is not an equation.
It is a framework, a way to look at the Universe.

Spring-And-Loop Theory says everything is composed of just two things: springs, and loops. The springs are the energy component. The loops are the mass component. But there has been a third component all along. The speed of light. Spring-And-Loop Theory says that springs bounce against springs, with the net effect that spring-to-spring transmission happens at the speed of light.

Spring-And-Loop Theory continues to ponder why energy equals mass times the speed of light squared but does find area-rather-than-volume examples in nature. With the exception of carbon, all chemical elements bond in two dimensions.

"It is ironic that Einstein's most creative work, the general theory of relativity, should boil down to conceptualizing space as a medium when his original premise [in special relativity] was that no such medium existed."
- Robert B. Laughlin, Nobel Laureate in Physics,
- endowed chair in physics, Stanford University

Spring-And-Loop Theory believes that the doldrums modern physics finds itself in are directly caused by it turning its back on the ether.

Spring-And-Loop Theory has maintained that the "ether" is pure energy, and is in fact the highest energy there is -- the spring-like energy of the Universal Matrix itself.

For those needing a reason to drop their ether-hate, consider this. The Michelson–Morley experiments and I'm sure every other ether measuring experiment, had the same flaw. They all assumed the ether would cause waves (of light or otherwise) to propagate faster or slower depending on how they were moving relative to the ether medium.

I am not aware of any ether test that considered the possibility of the ether itself moving at the speed of light (as Spring-And-Loop Theory maintains it does).

Modern physics is at once the most tolerant, and intolerant, of sciences.
String theory, as ugly a theory as has ever been presented, is more than tolerated because....why? Well, because supporting it makes thousands of scientists a very good living. That's why.

The concept of an ether that light travels through is not tolerated...why? Because it hasn't been found yet.

Spring-And-Loop Theory says that the entire universe is filled with ultra high energy springs and that mass is a special form of that energy, one that is stabilized into an enclosed loop. The vibrations of atoms are what happens when these ultra high energy springs become bound to lower energy loops -- a rambunctuous child holding on to a calm parental hand.

The four forces are all unified in this model. The strong force is that basic spring-loop bond. The weak force is that strong bond letting go, causing the spring to thrash around violently (until it recombines in some way). The electromagnetic force is the basic spring-spring interaction -- propagating every possible type of "particle" and exchange. Gravity, the subtle yet pervasive child of the other three forces, is the effect, on the Universal Matrix of springs, when a loop is introduced -- clamping part of a fish net creates a small effect felt everywhere in that net.

And so....
The speed of light is the propagation time through the Universal Matrix of springs. When you hit a spring, it bumps against its neighbor, and that neighbor bumps against their neighbor, and so on. There is a time taken for each interaction, and a distance (the size of each spring). Distance divided by time equals velocity.

Spring-And-Loop Theory says that the ether (i.e. springs) are such small components relative to matter (i.e. loops) that the motion of one has little if any impact on the motion of the other (at speeds much smaller than the speed of light). Springs can pass right through atoms, like mosquitos through a tennis racket. Try to measure that.

Einstein built on the earlier work of Poincare, Lorentz and Larmor, discarding exactly the ether component of their theory before re-labelling it as solely his own theory. This was morally wrong, and also set physics back a generation or more.

After a year of working with Spring-And-Loop Theory (and after creating videos on three more serious matters), it was realized that the speed of light is not constant but is decreasing with time.

There is a precedent for this. When light travels through different materials, the speed decreases (to one extent or another) relative to the speed in a "vacuum".

So what causes light to slow down in a material?

A car in traffic will move slower than one on a deserted Interstate highway. Easy enough to imagine. But what else could cause a car to go slower? Cheap gasoline could do it, as could an aging engine.

Spring-And-Loop Theory says the universe is one big mass of energy, quantized into something most easily visualized as springs. But the universe is expanding, the hot air balloon is getting bigger. Well what happens to the temperature of the air in the balloon as the balloon diameter expands? It must decrease, all other things being equal.

So, "space" is getting cooler.

Note that, while true, we are not referring to the 2.7 degree Cosmic Microwave Background temperature. The CMB is the viscosity of water, measured by a fish.

Spring-And-Loop Theory says (1) the fundamental energy within a spring is decreasing with time, (2) the speed of light is the spring to spring bump speed, and so (3) the speed of light must also be decreasing with time.

In round figures, every thousand years, the speed of light decreases by [2.99792458 * 39.34 in/m * 1/12 ft/in * 1000/2680 yr/yr] 3.67 feet per second (2.5 miles per hour).

Interpretation
Einstein's theories of Special and General Relativity came out about one hundred years ago. In that time, the speed of light has decreased by 0.25 miles per hour.

But Wikipedia says "Since 1983, the meter has been defined in the International System of Units (SI) as the distance light travels in vacuum in 1/299,792,458 of a second. This definition fixes the speed of light in vacuum at exactly 299,792,458 m/s."

Spring-And-Loop Theory says we "fix" the speed of light at our peril...

Since the speed of light is actually decreasing (as the universe expands), then, by definition, the "unchanging" meter is decreasing as well. But space is expanding. These two effects add together but since every distance everywhere changes to the same degree, the second effect can not be detected by us fish, measuring the viscosity of water.

Consequences of Consequences
The current definition of time (i.e. of a second) involves the number of oscillations of a cesium atom. The problem is that the number of oscillations per second changes as the spring pressure on an atom changes. So time is currently defined by something that is changing...
Take your pick
Any, many or all of these consequences could explain the "kilogram getting smaller" problem.
If it does, then mass, like distance and the speed of light, is decreasing with time...

In any case, Spring-And-Loop Theory is certain that the speed of light is not constant, but is decreasing with time.

And therefore...
The speed of light must have been faster in the past.
Negating the need for a miraculous "inflationary" period.

H/T to Alexander Unzicker through whom I stumbled on
Spring and Loop theory. He says that modern physics has
solved none of the main problems of physics for 100 years.
Killer Presentation from the Rational Physics Conference

This is not a new theory, instead -like Gaede- he hammers
wooden stakes into the heart of modern zombie physics:

_________________Minds are like parachutes.
They only function when open.